Geethamalar v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Geethamalar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Kanyakumari.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kaliyakkavilai Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

3.Sam Davidson ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023, to direct the second respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute of the petitioner and the third respondent and pass such further or other orders as this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Arun Kumar For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/5

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the second respondent not to interfere with the civil dispute of the petitioner and the third respondent.

2. According to the petitioner, there is a civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the third respondent and thereby, a suit in O.S.No.22 of 2025 is also pending. While so, the third respondent attempted the petitioner to evict without due process of law and thereby, he lodged a complaint and the same was assigned in CSR No.214 of 2025 and the third respondent also appeared for enquiry and given undertaking not to insist the petitioner to vacate the premises without due process of law. Therefore, the said complaint was closed on 20.02.2025. Thereafter, again the third respondent lodged a complaint before the second respondent and based on the same, the second respondent called the petitioner and compel the petitioner to vacate the premises. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court. 2/5

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the official respondents would submit that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, they conducted enquiry and the same was closed on 20.02.2025. Since both the parties agreed to go before the Civil Court for seeking appropriate remedy, thereafter no any complaint was lodged by the third respondent and the second respondent also not called the petitioner as alleged by him.

4. The prayer of the petitioner is to direct the second respondent not to interfere in the civil dispute. The second respondent also denied the alleged interference. Therefore, recording the above said submission of the second respondent, this Criminal Original Petition stands closed even without issuing notice to the third respondent.

24.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR 3/5

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Kanyakumari.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kaliyakkavilai Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P.DHANABAL, J.

BTR 24.03.2025 5/5